Content
85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is highly actionable and well-structured with explicit validation checkpoints and a clear pass/kill decision flow. Its only weakness is mild verbosity in the motivational sections that could be trimmed without losing clarity.
Suggestions
Tighten the 'Why this gate matters' section — the 90% vs 30% validity-ratio narrative is motivational padding; a one-line rationale would suffice.
Trim restated context within each question (e.g. 'The validate_finding result is necessary but not sufficient') to keep the decision criteria scannable.
Consider moving the worked integration pseudocode into a references file if the skill grows, keeping SKILL.md as the gate logic overview.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient and action-oriented, but sections like 'Why this gate matters' and the prose around each question add explanatory padding (e.g. validity-ratio earnings narrative) that could be tightened without losing the actionable core. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Each question gives concrete decision criteria with copy-paste-ready examples — exact impact statements, good/bad title pairs, and a runnable Integration code block with real kg_add_node/update_objective calls. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 7-step sequence with an explicit decision checkpoint ('If all 7 are yes proceed; if any is no kill'), plus the Integration section encodes a validate -> gate -> pass/blocked feedback loop with recorded reasons. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A self-contained, well-organized single-purpose skill with clear section headers (questions, Decision, Anti-patterns, Cross-references) and one-level cross-references; no bundle files exist so the body appropriately holds all content inline. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |